Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Religion  > Abortion [CLOSED - Run Its Course - Circular Discussion]      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 altruist80
Joined: 10/13/2006
Msg: 776
AbortionPage 32 of 35    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35)
Why is it that some people think that the WAY to solve the World's Woes, is to Kill People off? Why is that? I wonder who the other historical people were that held this belief system?


Most of them are dead, haha.

At least you bothered to address that post. I was too busy deciding whether or not to laugh or cry. It's amazing that this argument evolves into taxes and death as a twisted kind of mercy. Strange that those who argue it do not go and immediately kill themselves.

Looking BELOW

HAHAHAHAHAHA.... I can't believe I missed that! Priceless!
 capegardengirl
Joined: 4/29/2006
Msg: 777
Abortion
Posted: 7/9/2008 9:56:49 PM
Those in favor of legal abortion arent supporting killing people off....I never met a woman who had an abortion who was in favor of killing people off..,,,...Women who are forced to bear children against their will have already lost their souls..What about them?...Or dont they even matter?,..What about the lost souls of children who are unwanted?...A part of them is already dead
 allegiant_one
Joined: 6/3/2008
Msg: 778
Abortion
Posted: 7/9/2008 10:16:17 PM
altruist80,


At least you bothered to address that post. I was too busy deciding whether or not to laugh or cry. It's amazing that this argument evolves into taxes and death as a twisted kind of mercy. Strange that those who argue it do not go and immediately kill themselves.


LOL...I agree with your concluding sentence. I find it a tremendous mental exercise trying to discern how people come to these "hopeless, doom and gloom" conclusions (Child Abuse for instance) to justify death via abortion; and yet they are so emotionally appalled at Child Abuse?!?! I would think that "Killing the Innocent" in the womb is the Worst Form of Child Abuse Imaginable.

But I suppose their twisted logic dictates that its easier (and more convenient) to Kill someone they can't see or hear......and then "Rationalize it Away".

 altruist80
Joined: 10/13/2006
Msg: 779
Abortion
Posted: 7/9/2008 10:22:35 PM
But I suppose their twisted logic dictates that its easier (and more convenient) to Kill someone they can't see or hear......and then "Rationalize it Away".


Well you know... Out of sight, out of mind. I think that applies to the pro-choice delusion because abortionists literally do not have to face what they are doing.



Putting things in bold and responding with "hmmmmm..." is definately intelligent and gets your point across well, I'm certain.


Hiryuu, It seems you missed the punchline. He placed your own words in bold format and showed how immediately contradicted yourself in the same breath. It was just about the funniest thing I've ever seen. I laughed till I cried.

I like to respond to posts, not ignore them for the most part and reply to the bits and peices I feel like... I must have made about 10 points that have not, at all, been replied to. Those who are close-minded just love picking and choosing.


Actually it is quite the opposite. If you will notice, I couldn't disagree more with Frogeyes, but he knows how to argue and follow the standards of logic. If you post a bunch of broken reasoning and then scoff at a clear refutal, there is no point in even responding. It is twice the work to piece together a broken and misdirected argument, and nothing but headache to have one arguing in such a way to completely dodge the refutal. There is also the issue that these posts tend to move a bit fast, and no one gets every point addressed all the time. My entire explanation in post 668 was completely ignored, but does that mean I won the argument? No. Clearly not, because I am still arguing.

Those in favor of legal abortion arent supporting killing people off....I never met a woman who had an abortion who was in favor of killing people off..,,,...Women who are forced to bear children against their will have already lost their souls..What about them?...Or dont they even matter?,..What about the lost souls of children who are unwanted?...A part of them is already dead


I think you fail to realize that pro-lifers are not a bunch of swinging d**ks who are out destroy all of your inalienable freedoms, oppress the poor, and enslave the children. We are out to rectify the terrible injustice of forced mortality. An injustice you support as "humane" and "merciful." I think many people miss my point about the suicide comparison. If you truly thought that life is such a terrible prospect, you would go and end it right now. If you did, at least no one would be forcing you to do it. At least no one would say "you're better off dead" or "your life sucks so I'm going to do you a favor and end it." We all retain the choice to live or die. Isn't that what is really inalienable considering everything else rests upon upon it?
 forum_moderator
Joined: 1/24/2003
Msg: 780
view profile
History
Abortion
Posted: 7/9/2008 11:11:20 PM


*- Flame/Trolling posts Deleted. Address the topic Not Each Other. Those failing to adhere to basic PoF Forum Rules will find their posting limited or suspended -TheMadFiddler-*
 sihtdaeruoynac
Joined: 6/16/2008
Msg: 781
Abortion
Posted: 7/10/2008 12:36:14 AM
Very , very wrong...Actually its quite true that poverty is a the largest factor regarding child abuse and neglect as well as mental illness...Poor single mothers have less supports, money and resources to help themselves than do wealthier women....Their mental illness is complicatd and more severe because they dont get the treatment they need..


LOL you are so wrong that's modern way of treating disease. PILLS PILLS PILLS.
It has been proven making a diet change, taking vitamins and a little bit of therapy can treat depression. So much for the so needed $$$ for medication and years of therapy. For example I talked with a woman who was very depressed, she didn't like her job, herself or anything. I talked to her for one day, got her to do something, in a week she called me and she was totally completely changed woman. Her depression was completely gone. Sure she was the one of the lucky ones to change that fast but it just shows you don't need to throw money to solve mental illness for most people. Of course people have to want to change if they are not willing to change nothing can change that. Even meds can't treat mental illness for a lot of people because of poor diet habits.
Here is a little homework for you go to this site and read when you have time if you care to: http://biomedx.com/microscopes/rrintro/rrintro.html


A true pro life supporert won't eat meat.


..I never met a woman who had an abortion who was in favor of killing people off..,,,...Women who are forced to bear children against their will have already lost their souls..What about them?...Or dont they even matter?,..What about the lost souls of children who are unwanted?...A part of them is already dead


Unwanted child can still get over it, they can find a mate, they get married, they can learn to forgive their parents. My best friend was an unwanted child, his mother wanted nothing to do with her. Yet he is not mentally ill, he has many kids and grandchildren. He is one hell of a smart guy and nicest guy you will ever meet. If his mother had an abortion there would be many people who needed him would do without. People are meant to suffer, we all suffer, it's just that you don't realize it.

If a woman has no soul the spirit or devil has taken over her body, that's her own fault nobody else's. I don't see how bearing a child can make a woman lose her soul anyways. Look at korea and japan. Korean had many wars and attacked many times. According to your theory all women should had abortion since many of them were very poor at the time. You think soldiers have a hard time, I will tell you in Korea I have seen pictures where there's kids holding guns. When they were old enough to hold a gun and run they were fighting in the war.

You think people in North America have it bad in china if you have too many kids you are forced to have abortion. You have no choice because of overpopulation. Then there's people who are murder for their organs since they have certain beliefs. Nobody should be playing "god" to an unborn innocent child.
 capegardengirl
Joined: 4/29/2006
Msg: 782
Abortion
Posted: 7/10/2008 8:36:11 AM
sih...Im in total support of people changing their diet and including lifestyle changes to improve their mental health but those things alone dont cure severe mental illness like schziphrenia and bipolar disorder and severe forms of PTSD....I encourage that all the time..However.....Eating a healthy diet isnt going to get rid of hallucinations, flashbacks, panic attacks and suicidal ideation ..But medication and therapy combined together have proven to be the best treatment for those illnesses...Women who have been denied an abortion because it was illegal at the time of their pregnancy have a much higher incidence of depression, drug and alcohol abuse, medication use and suffer other forms of mental illness..They are much more likely to abuse or neglect their children and become addicted to substances..This costs people millions in healthcare, social services..Im not saying all people who are unwanted arent succesful in life ...I dont agree with you that women should suffer needlessly..Nor do I think they should be blamed for an unwanted pregnancy..The vast majority of women I met who had an abotion were using brith control...I find it very disturbing that you want to punish them for having control over their own lives and bodies....There is such a fear of womens power here its unbelievable.....I think when you have seen what I have and the huge societal cost of preventable suffering like women living with unwanted children, something like your desire to impose your laws on everyone else is trite and pretty rediculous and hugely costly in every way...Of course you dont "see" how bearing unwanted children affects womens souls....Youve never had to deal with that up close and personal with many, many women and see what happens afterwards...Yet knowing that, you still think you have the right to impose your laws and rules and play with their lives that way then walk away from any responsibility of forcing your rules on them... And you are quite wrong about my beliefs about suffering...Some suffering is a fact of life....Death, natural disasters, divorce, dissapointments....We all suffer, thats a fact of life.....Preventable suffering shouldnt be tolerated, one should not be a martyr and do nothing about that ...THAT causes mental illness from what Ive witnessed in people...Child abuse and domestic violence and substance abuse are forms of preventable suffering that shouldnt be tolerated at all...Your "theory" about my theory on abortion is totally off the mark here...Abortion should be a choice for everyone , whether that woman is poor, wealthy, or in between....I find it ironic that you dont want people playing "god" when they support abortion but what the heck do you think antichoice folks are doing???..They are also playing "god" with womens lives by dictating their choice over hers then walking away from any responsibility on that...Your minimization of the consequences of illegal abortion also supports your playing god that way..I also find it so ironic that you discourage so much pill taking (which I agree with) yet support the very actions that INCREASE pill taking, like the consequences of women living with illegal abortions ....During the 1950s, women were the biggest abusers of RX narcotics and prescrition drugs like Valium...Its no surprise that abortion was illegal and dangerous, women died or were maimed and taumatized then, birth control only limited to married women and no BC pills, and many forms of educational, social and economic privledges closed to women at that time...Lest we forget, for women of color, living under the terror of Jim Crow laws was in full force ...All those social ills that affect womens mental and physical health would INCREASE and INCREASE pill taking if abortion became illegal again

To that poster who thought his "morality" would make things right regarding women having abortions, get off it....Unbelievable egotistical and elitist here...You will never force your attittude on any woman..They will go behind your back and have abortions whether you like it or not..You cant control them, their thoughts or actions ....They will fake it and lie it to your face as long as you disrespect them that way ...How is that helpful?......Deal with your overcontrol issues instead here
 sihtdaeruoynac
Joined: 6/16/2008
Msg: 783
Abortion
Posted: 7/10/2008 9:08:04 AM

sih...Im in total support of people changing their diet and including lifestyle changes to improve their mental health but those things alone dont cure severe mental illness like schziphrenia and bipolar disorder and severe forms of PTSD..
Actually there is a person on here that has no symptoms of bi polar since this person changed diet. So no I don't buy your story. I believe 60 to 80 per cent of the people can change by diet and some therapy. Your idea of diet is different than the diet will solve the problem. We as a society eat way too much acidic foods. It is not enough just to avoid sugars, too much meat etc.


...you still think you have the right to impose your laws and rules and play with their lives that way then walk away from any responsibility of forcing your rules on them... And you are quite wrong about my beliefs about suffering...Some suffering is a fact of life....Death, natural disasters, divorce, dissapointments....We all suffer, thats a fact of life.....Preventable suffering shouldnt be tolerated, one should not be a martyr and do nothing about that ...THAT causes mental illness from what Ive witnessed in people...Child abuse and domestic violence and substance abuse are forms of preventable suffering that shouldnt be tolerated at all...Your "theory" about my theory on abortion is totally off the mark here


This is a debate I never stated I wanted to change the laws. I am simply stating my opinion. What a woman does her business. I won't say a word to her about it but it does not mean I have to be with a woman who chooses to take the easy way out.

Preventable suffering? You can not really prevent suffering. Well we all should die then since just breathing can be suffering. With all the pollution, toxic chemcials and many people getting cancer. The way your way of thinking ending your life is much easier to end the suffering. Many people would choose to die then deal with the extreme pain if they knew there wasn't a cure. Many spiritual healers believe one suffers due to karma. And what they say I found to be true. One does bad thing he or she will pay the price sooner or later. I don't know how you can run away from karma. There is a man in Brazil called John of God who healed over 15 million people. The guy who learned how to heal from him stated one has karma and that is why people get ill and suffer. If a person doesn't pay now he or she will pay later, except it will be much worse. So much for preventable suffering.


http://www.blavatsky.net/magazine/theosophy/ww/additional/StudiesInKarma-Series/SufferingOfAnimals.html
http://www.getting-positive-karma-now.com/reincarnation.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma
http://www.truelifekarma.com/about.php
 altruist80
Joined: 10/13/2006
Msg: 784
Abortion
Posted: 7/10/2008 9:21:18 AM
To that poster who thought his "morality" would make things right regarding women having abortions, get off it....Unbelievable egotistical and elitist here...You will never force your attittude on any woman..They will go behind your back and have abortions whether you like it or not..You cant control them, their thoughts or actions ....They will fake it and lie it to your face as long as you disrespect them that way ...How is that helpful?......Deal with your overcontrol issues instead here


Funny how you do not realize there is more than one meaning to the word mortality. Let me spell it out for you courtesy of Merriam-Webster.

Main Entry: mor·tal·i·ty
Pronunciation: \mo?r-'ta-l?-te\
Function: noun
Date: 14th century
1: the quality or state of being mortal
2: the death of large numbers (as of people or animals)
3: archaic : death
4: the human race
5 a: the number of deaths in a given time or place b: the proportion of deaths to population c: the number lost or the rate of loss or failure

See the little bold entries? If you ignore everything else in this post, at least you will have learned something.

As for the rest of that... whatever you call it... it's not an argument. It's rhetoric. And it's pointless. Your arguments thus far have been argumentum ad misericordiam for women. This is not solely a womens' rights issue. This is a human rights issue. You commit a fallacy of exclusion by completely ignoring the fetus. The rest are personal attacks. I feel sorry for you if actually think in your head that this is the best way to arrive at a well-thought conclusion.

A true pro life supporert won't eat meat.


Then consider me pro-human.
 altruist80
Joined: 10/13/2006
Msg: 785
Abortion
Posted: 7/10/2008 11:11:05 PM
Here is another one for the life-questionablity aspect. Maybe we need a fresh start considering the arguments went way off base and we all got mod-hammered.

An excerpt from my research paper:

...an analogy can now be drawn from Anne Hendershott’s account of Francis J. Beckwith’s Defending Life:

"…he asks the reader to imagine a shooting range next to an elementary school playground. The county prohibits the range from operating when the students are on the playground because there is a one-percent chance that a bullet will ricochet off one of the targets and hit a child" (Hendershott, 2008).

Beckwith goes on to state that a civil liberty case may be argued to the county commission which should reasonably allow the range to express their right to be unrestricted by the commission and such a policy would violate their free enterprise. Beckwith proposes that the commission should respond as follows:

“Yes, your principle may be correct, but you are in fact unreasonable in rejecting the policy’s constraint on your liberty, for reason requires that you accept a public policy to protect the innocent from unjust harm.” (Hendershott, 2008).

Reason clearly suggests that the prospect of mortality prohibits reckless abandon, and such a principle outweighs other subordinate civil liberties, coined “subordinate” righteously so because liberty is impossible without life. Abortion, given only the smallest probability of mortality, must only be viewed as reckless in absence of the absolutes required to ensure life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to all of humankind...

If anyone has statistics on how long the worst part of an emotional trauma lasts from an adoption case, they will be helpful. Since the average life expectency is 77.8 years, we could comapre the numbers side by side.
 romanticoptimist
Joined: 10/1/2007
Msg: 786
Abortion
Posted: 7/11/2008 1:14:27 PM
It seems unkind and inhumane to me to declare "Abortion is MURDER!!!!!!" to a woman who has had an abortion and is suffering from the quite common sense of guilt and/or loss about the decision. While I would prefer it didn't happen, I cannot bring myself to judge a woman who has made the decision harshly.

Can we not debate and discuss this issue without allowing ourselves and others at either extreme to polarise the debate? Surely, we can all agree that some women have abortions for convenience and can afford and have the resources to carry the child to term. I think we can also all agree that some women 100% feel unable to do so, and the notion of forcing a woman to keep the child to term and then deliver against her will is abhorrent to any person with any regard for fundamental human rights.

As for gender, the issue as a human rights issue or as a rights of the unborn issue is gender neutral. The decision to have an abortion or not impacts both genders, both parents (demonized examples notwithstanding). As such it is gender neutral. However, a significant part of the impact of any decision is gender specific, that of the woman. It is a fact that males so not carry a child for nine months, are are not primarily responsible for the care of children, and are less likely to form the sort of mother-child bonds that a woman carrying a child forms with the child in her womb. Not that there aren't fathers who are better than mothers, but generally the above is true.
 sihtdaeruoynac
Joined: 6/16/2008
Msg: 787
Abortion
Posted: 7/11/2008 1:19:06 PM

I think we can also all agree that some women 100% feel unable to do so, and the notion of forcing a woman to keep the child to term and then deliver against her will is abhorrent to any person with any regard for fundamental human rights.


What about the rights of the unborn fetus?
 LateFall
Joined: 9/29/2006
Msg: 788
Abortion
Posted: 7/11/2008 3:33:57 PM
Fetuses don't have rights.
 allegiant_one
Joined: 6/3/2008
Msg: 789
Abortion
Posted: 7/11/2008 5:13:31 PM
romanticoptimist,



It seems unkind and inhumane to me to declare "Abortion is MURDER!!!!!!" to a woman who has had an abortion and is suffering from the quite common sense of guilt and/or loss about the decision. While I would prefer it didn't happen, I cannot bring myself to judge a woman who has made the decision harshly.


OK. I'll give you this, BUT ONLY based on the last word of your paragraph - "harshly". You walk on a "slippery slope" by saying that you wouldn't "judge"; notwithstanding you did clarify "judge a woman". I do think the more appropriate word to use would have been "condemn". It is most appropriate to "judge" between right and wrong, good and evil. Jesus never said we are to be "unwise" or to "throw our cares to the wind", but rather to discern between right and wrong, good and evil; and to love, protect and guide by our words and deeds. And to model Himself (Christ) to a lost and dying world.

Also, you "assume" that a woman is suffering from the common sense guilt and/or loss about the decision. I'm sure if you took a poll, you would find that this is not 100% true. In Romans 1, God didn't distinguish what gender would possess a "reprobate" mind and I'm sure if you read some of the posts in this Forum, or participate in a chatroom on Abortion (say on Yahoo), you would not give a "blanket pass" on how women feel, say or think on their decision. Afterall, God says in Scripture, regarding some, that He "Gave Them Up" to a reprobate mind.



Can we not debate and discuss this issue without allowing ourselves and others at either extreme to polarise the debate? Surely, we can all agree that some women have abortions for convenience and can afford and have the resources to carry the child to term. I think we can also all agree that some women 100% feel unable to do so, and the notion of forcing a woman to keep the child to term and then deliver against her will is abhorrent to any person with any regard for fundamental human rights.


I'm sure we can, but this is an emotional issue and all of us get "caught up" in the polarization of the debate. Also, some people can only debate out of "emotion". They don't understand the etiquette and rules of the art. You also need to define "extreme", in light of what certain words are appropriate to use. Sure....some words inflame, but some words are true. I agree, tact and sensitivity should be the "rule of the day" in debate. But, I'm surprised to read that your conclusions ring sterile when you mention that "some women have abortions for convenience". If the entity in the womb is a Human Being, shouldn't your words about "aborting for convenience" ring of callousness and selfishness? Doesn't the "slaughter of the innocent" bring tears to your eyes? Doesn't it sicken you when people are casual and insensitive about Abortion? And using your word, don't you find it "abhorrent" that people actually think and believe that Abortion is a Right? Or are you desensitized?

I'm not badgering on you, but there is no moral neutrality on Abortion...no matter who or which side your on. And despite if Abortion is for convenience or not, is quite irrelavant. What is relavant and worthy of discussion, is determining and establishing "what" is in the womb. And then deciding, "can we kill it"? Anyone can come up with all kinds of reasons and examples to "why" they would have an Abortion. But if the "people in the womb" are as "Equally" Human as a toddler is, then doesn't it deserve the same protection under law? Or can it be "open season" on toddlers, too? And so we debate the Humanity of the people in the womb.

Life is fragile for all of us. We've all lost loved ones and we've experienced the pain of grief and loss....and also regret. We miss them, not because they were Human Beings, but because we knew them and we loved them. And all that "knowing" and "loving" began with a decision to NOT have an Abortion and to follow through with a pregnancy. Perhaps thats where you're coming from with the "common sense of guilt and/or loss" statement. But one will never "know" or "love" the end result of an Abortion, for obvious reasons. And that aborted person from the womb, will never have the opportunity to make that "life or death" decision for themselves. That CHOICE was made for them. That CHOICE was taken from them. So, are Pro-Choice people, really Pro-Choice? For the woman?...maybe yes...For the person in the womb?....absolutely not. Isn't that what we are supposed to regard as "fundamental human rights", as you say?



As for gender, the issue as a human rights issue or as a rights of the unborn issue is gender neutral. The decision to have an abortion or not impacts both genders, both parents (demonized examples notwithstanding). As such it is gender neutral. However, a significant part of the impact of any decision is gender specific, that of the woman. It is a fact that males so not carry a child for nine months, are are not primarily responsible for the care of children, and are less likely to form the sort of mother-child bonds that a woman carrying a child forms with the child in her womb. Not that there aren't fathers who are better than mothers, but generally the above is true.


True...and on that, I will make an Objective Moral Claim...

We can do BETTER than Abortion ! Pregnancy is something that can be “managed”, without anyone being Killed !

 designingwoman
Joined: 9/4/2005
Msg: 790
view profile
History
Abortion
Posted: 7/11/2008 5:27:20 PM
In this whole argument, it seems like a very important alternative to abortion or keeping a baby a woman can't take care of is being ignored. ADOPTION is the Caring Option. Seems to me that abortion is talked about so much as a choice as opposed to providing information about the adoption alternative.

Normally I would recommend adoption if someone came to me and wanted advice on the subject. However, if a woman is raped, or a child becomes pregnant due to molestation or incest, I don't object to early term abortions under those trying circumstances. Better is the choice to immediately get emergency contraceptives if this happens. A child however, might not know better, and the child might not be aware of the possibility of pregnancy. With that said, most unwanted pregnancies can be carried to term and the child given up for adoption. There are many couples who can't bear children who would love to adopt a baby.
 bear45408
Joined: 7/30/2007
Msg: 791
Abortion
Posted: 7/13/2008 8:54:45 AM

What about the rights of the unborn fetus?



We can do BETTER than Abortion ! Pregnancy is something that can be “managed”, without anyone being Killed !


Both of these quotes makes the same assumption: That the fetus is a human being. That's the question, not the premise.

The question of when a fetus becomes a human being is unresolved. Many do not think that it is at the moment of conception. This is a religious concept, rather than a medical one. For all we know it could be sooner (i.e. The separate sperm and egg, being destined to be united and become a human being, ought to be protected) or later, which places it at sentience, quickening, or appoximately the 1st trimester (the more traditional view), or at birth. I personally tend toward the traditional view.

There does not seem to be any reason to view the fetus as a human being prior to sentience, other than the religious one. Indeed, 1/3 of these fetuses are spontaneously aborted anyway, without any interference from anyone. If these are actually human beings, I'd like someone to address the issue of what happens to their souls.

Those against abortion ought to keep in mind that no one is forcing abortion upon them. They are the ones wishing to enforce their religious views on those who differ.

Once again, thanks to Romanticoptimist for toning down the rhetoric.

I suggest that those of you who who believe abortion is wrong to concentrate your arguments on why life begins at conception. Shouting "Abortion is Murder" won't do it. It's only murder if it's a human being. We kill things every day with no remorse that are not human beings. Ever hear of anti-bacterial soap? Those poor poor bacteria! OK, so I'm being a bit facetious, but I hope my point is gotten.
 sihtdaeruoynac
Joined: 6/16/2008
Msg: 792
Abortion
Posted: 7/13/2008 9:15:43 AM

Those against abortion ought to keep in mind that no one is forcing abortion upon them. They are the ones wishing to enforce their religious views on those who differ.


You're assuming things. I'm not even Christian at all. I think it's about morals. I don't use anti bacterial soap it's bad for you anyways. Silly comparison. Sure we need to eat and clean ourselves but I don't think we should kill a life if we don't have to.
 romanticoptimist
Joined: 10/1/2007
Msg: 793
Abortion
Posted: 7/13/2008 9:39:37 AM

Once again, thanks to Romanticoptimist for toning down the rhetoric.

Thanks, but I don't think it helped. It is clear to me that certain parties engaged in this debate have drawn their lines in the sand and anyone on "their" side is 'good" and anyone on the "other" side" is "bad", and that is the filter they will use to read any comments no matter how clearly worded.

I just hope we can avoid wandering down the off-topic rights of bacteria, vegan/vegetarianism, and the curative powers of food re treating bi-polar disorders. they really have nothing to do with this issue.
 bear45408
Joined: 7/30/2007
Msg: 794
Abortion
Posted: 7/13/2008 9:54:47 AM

You're assuming things. I'm not even Christian at all. I think it's about morals. I don't use anti bacterial soap it's bad for you anyways. Silly comparison. Sure we need to eat and clean ourselves but I don't think we should kill a life if we don't have to.

Your posts have, for the most part been thoughtful. But what do you think I'm assuming? My comparison to anti bacterial soap was simply to illustrate that we feel free to kill things that are not human. The fact that something is living is not the criterion we use. As I said:

Both of these quotes makes the same assumption: That the fetus is a human being. That's the question, not the premise.


My position, that human life starts at quickening or sentience is quite a bit more conservative than the legal view that human life starts at birth. I think that one ought to take a very careful view of these things, because, as you point out, it is a moral question. But the view that human life begins at conception is, in my opinion, beyond conservative. It is a religious point of view, not necessarily, in my opinion a moral one.

So I think we're back to the original question. When does human life begin?
 trippy_hare
Joined: 5/30/2006
Msg: 795
Abortion
Posted: 7/13/2008 9:55:43 AM
Oh, good. This thread is back on the frontpage. AGAIN.

Pro-lifers are all talk and little else. If the life of the unborn child was so all-important, they would not abandon it after it is born. And as for the notion that women choose abortions as a method of birth control- utterly preposterous. The percentage of women who refuse other means of birth control and rely on an invasive surgical procedure is miniscule to the point of being anomalous. Abortions are mostly done in cases where birth would harm or kill the mother, rape or incest babies, severe and detectable genetic disorders or developmental diseases, and- rarely- when the mother does not consider herself fit enough to carry a child to term.

Honestly? MORE women should get abortions, not LESS. Do you have any idea how many drug addicts give birth to chronically addicted children? Right from the day they see light, their brains are hard-wired to need cocaine, or meth, or heroin. What a great way to start life! And since pro-lifers spend all their time and rhetoric convincing these addicts to bear their children- but don't spend ANY trying to help those children have some sort of stable, healthy environment- the cycle will only perpetuate.

I said my piece on this thread before, and I'm not going to say it again. Suffice to say: it is terrible that we live in a society where abortions and Sanctuary laws have to happen. But we do. Change the society, and then maybe we won't.
 sihtdaeruoynac
Joined: 6/16/2008
Msg: 796
Abortion
Posted: 7/13/2008 11:31:35 AM

t is a religious point of view, not necessarily, in my opinion a moral one.

So I think we're back to the original question. When does human life begin?


No I am sure some Christians do have abortions, maybe they don't let anyone else know but I am sure some of them do. NO you are assuming it is a religious point of view. I do not worship god(s), read the bible, or pray. Nor do I go to a Buddhist temple etc.
Your so called view is based on assumptions, doesn't mean it is necessarily so. Just because it's law doesn't mean it's morally right. For example capital punishment in USA but not in Canada. Are you going to say the Canadian government is religious?
Obviously we have to eat sleep and live, if he didn't clean after ourselves, eat and whatever we can't survive. Most cases abortion isn't matter of survival. Intentional killing and and killing bacteria so a human being can live is two different matters. Doesn't matter what kind of life a child will have once he or she is born. Maybe humans are here to suffer for whatever reason, who are we to play "god".
 bear45408
Joined: 7/30/2007
Msg: 797
Abortion
Posted: 7/13/2008 12:24:15 PM

Your so called view is based on assumptions, doesn't mean it is necessarily so. Just because it's law doesn't mean it's morally right.
My view, not my "so called view", has been explained in detail in precceeding posts. Your reply, "Just because it's the law", clearly indicates that you have not bothered to read it.

Now go back and read what I actually said, stop personal attacks, and stop dancing around the question. We all agree it is immoral to kill a human being. The question is when does it become a human being. Answer that question instead of all of the other things you are getting into.
 allegiant_one
Joined: 6/3/2008
Msg: 798
Abortion
Posted: 7/13/2008 1:52:06 PM

So I think we're back to the original question. When does human life begin?


I can't believe this is still being debated. Even PLANNED PARENTHOOD’S, late President, Dr. Allen Gutemacher made the observation about Life Beginning at Conception.

He said “I can’t believe there was anyone out there that doesn’t know this.”

People.....Since Conception was discovered in 1824 by “Modern Biology”, NO-ONE has disputed that Life begins at Conception!

Questions....

So why would people dispute Conception NOW?
And what are the motives behind the dispute?

Possible answers?

Is it to relinquish a negative emotion?
Is it to rationalize an ideolog or a belief system?
Is it to justify the Abortion act itself?
Or could it be so to DISTORT was is empiricle, proven, and known?

For crying out loud !
 sihtdaeruoynac
Joined: 6/16/2008
Msg: 799
Abortion
Posted: 7/13/2008 1:56:00 PM
Looks like your dancing yourself, you claiming that anti-abortion is a religious view when I'm not even remotely religious. That is a fact you're assuming. I didn't say it YOU did. Yet now you totoally ignore that.


Your reply, "Just because it's the law", clearly indicates that you have not bothered to read it.

Yes I read what you posted, I am just setting an example, obviously it the law that defined how abortion is legal. I never said you said anything about law. I am bring it up because I want to. If you can't handle my point I'm sorry you can't deal with it.


Not attacking you but it's my view, sorry you can't accept my personal views as attacks, just means you're taking the debate personally. Not the question if it's a human being but can it feel pain and has consciousness. "Human being" is based on the belief of medical science it doesn't mean it's right. The medical definition of human being is probably not accurate or correct. You just assume it is because you accepted the theory that is all.
 bear45408
Joined: 7/30/2007
Msg: 800
Abortion
Posted: 7/13/2008 2:10:54 PM
^^^
Possible answers?
Because it's the only real rational question here, and the answer given, that human life begins at conception, is not the one that was believed, even by the Church, for most of history.


People.....Since Conception was discovered in 1824 by “Modern Biology”, NO-ONE has disputed that Life begins at Conception!

Obviously soneone has questioned it, or we wouldn't have this exceptionally long thread. You aren't looking!
Show ALL Forums  > Religion  > Abortion [CLOSED - Run Its Course - Circular Discussion]